Editing Openai/695d4253-5060-8005-95db-586e777927f4 (section)

==== Practical mitigations (any combination is acceptable): ====
# Differentiated rate actions by plan (experience-based pricing) - Increase Plan B more (it is severely underpriced at LR ~128%) and hold flat/decrease Plan A (LR ~52%) rather than a uniform increase. - Justification: reduces cross-subsidy that otherwise encourages healthy migration to A and leaves B underpriced.
# Change employer contribution strategy to preserve relative affordability - Contribute a percentage of premium (e.g., 80%) or contribute more to Plan B to keep employee differential stable. - Justification: reduces employee-driven anti-selection driven by payroll deduction differences.
# Implement enrollment/plan-switching controls - Limit mid-year moves; default mapping; active enrollment with decision support; minimum commitment period. - Justification: reduces opportunistic switching based on emerging claims.
# Adjust plan designs to reduce selection (if permitted) - Narrow the “buy-up” value gap (e.g., align deductibles/OOP features; add HSA seed funding to CDHP; or enhance value-based benefits in A). - Justification: lowers incentive for healthy/low utilizers to disproportionately choose one plan.

Any of the above directly targets the root issue: material morbidity sorting (A ~58% vs B ~142%) that a uniform rate change is likely to exacerbate.